BERT HOWE
  • Nationwide: (800) 482-1822    
    casino resort building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom homes building expert Cambridge Massachusetts institutional building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts high-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts production housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Subterranean parking building expert Cambridge Massachusetts concrete tilt-up building expert Cambridge Massachusetts mid-rise construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts office building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts parking structure building expert Cambridge Massachusetts multi family housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts tract home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts low-income housing building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominium building expert Cambridge Massachusetts structural steel construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts townhome construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts industrial building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts condominiums building expert Cambridge Massachusetts custom home building expert Cambridge Massachusetts hospital construction building expert Cambridge Massachusetts Medical building building expert Cambridge Massachusetts
    Cambridge Massachusetts expert witness concrete failureCambridge Massachusetts construction claims expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts architectural expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction forensic expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts construction expert witness public projectsCambridge Massachusetts construction defect expert witnessCambridge Massachusetts architecture expert witness
    Arrange No Cost Consultation
    Building Expert Builders Information
    Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Massachusetts Builders Right To Repair Current Law Summary:

    Current Law Summary: Case law precedent


    Building Expert Contractors Licensing
    Guidelines Cambridge Massachusetts

    No state license required for general contracting. Licensure required for plumbing and electrical trades. Companies selling home repair services must be registered with the state.


    Building Expert Contractors Building Industry
    Association Directory
    Builders Association of Central Massachusetts Inc
    Local # 2280
    51 Pullman Street
    Worcester, MA 01606

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Massachusetts Home Builders Association
    Local # 2200
    700 Congress St Suite 200
    Quincy, MA 02169

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Builders Association of Greater Boston
    Local # 2220
    700 Congress St. Suite 202
    Quincy, MA 02169

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    North East Builders Assn of MA
    Local # 2255
    170 Main St Suite 205
    Tewksbury, MA 01876

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders and Remodelers Association of Western Mass
    Local # 2270
    240 Cadwell Dr
    Springfield, MA 01104

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Bristol-Norfolk Home Builders Association
    Local # 2211
    65 Neponset Ave Ste 3
    Foxboro, MA 02035

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10

    Home Builders & Remodelers Association of Cape Cod
    Local # 2230
    9 New Venture Dr #7
    South Dennis, MA 02660

    Cambridge Massachusetts Building Expert 10/ 10


    Building Expert News and Information
    For Cambridge Massachusetts


    NYC’s First Five-Star Hotel in Decade Seen at One57 Tower

    Merger to Create Massive Los Angeles Construction Firm

    It Has Started: Supply-Chain, Warehouse and Retail Workers of Essential Businesses Are Filing Suit

    Bank Window Lawsuit Settles Quietly

    Washington State Enacts Law Restricting Non-Compete Agreements

    Lien Claimant’s Right to Execute against Bond Upheld in Court of Appeals

    Federal District Court Issues Preliminary Injunction Against Implementation of the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Final Rule

    Duty to Defend Broadly Applies to Entire Action; Insured Need Not Apportion Defense Costs, Says Maryland Appeals Court

    PA Superior Court Provides Clarification on Definition of CGL “Occurrence” When Property Damage Is Caused by Faulty Building Conditions

    Want to Stay Up on Your Mechanic’s Lien Deadlines? Write a Letter or Two

    Towards Paperless Construction: PaperLight

    How a 10-Story Wood Building Survived More Than 100 Earthquakes

    Contractors Should be Aware of Homeowner Duties When Invited to Perform Residential Work

    A Classic Blunder: Practical Advice for Avoiding Two-Front Wars

    Thank You for 17 Years of Legal Elite in Construction Law

    Enforceability of Contract Provisions Extending Liquidated Damages Beyond Substantial Completion

    KB to Spend $43.2 Million on Florida Construction Defects

    Terminating A Subcontractor Or Sub-Tier Contractor—Not So Fast—Read Your Contract!

    2018 Update to EPA’s “Superfund Task Force Report”

    Erdogan Vows to Punish Shoddy Builders Ahead of Crucial Election

    The Year 2010 In Review: Design And Construction Defects Litigation

    Jury Instruction That Fails to Utilize Concurrent Cause for Property Loss is Erroneous

    Impact of Lis Pendens on Unrecorded Interests / Liens

    Toll Brothers to Acquire Shapell for $1.6 Billion

    Arizona Supreme Court Confirms a Prevailing Homeowner Can Recover Fees on Implied Warranty Claims

    Designer of World’s Tallest Building Wants to Turn Skyscrapers Into Batteries

    Saved By The Statute: The Economic Loss Doctrine Does Not Bar Claims Under Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law

    New ConsensusDocs 242 Design Professional Change Order Form Helps Facilitate Compensation for Changes in Design Services

    New OSHA Regulations on Confined Spaces in Construction

    New York Converting Unlikely Buildings into Condominiums

    Preventing Costly Litigation Through Your Construction Contract

    A Court-Side Seat: May Brings Federal Appellate Courts Rulings and Executive Orders

    The Increasing Trend of Caps in Construction Contracts and Negotiating Them

    Congratulations to Haight’s 2021 Super Lawyers San Diego Rising Stars

    Zurich American Insurance Company v. Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company

    Trucks looking for Defects Create Social Media Frenzy

    Get Your Contracts Lean- Its Better than Dieting

    What is the Implied Warranty of Habitability?

    Personal Injury Claims – The Basics

    Finding Highway Compromise ‘Tough,’ DOT Secretary Says

    Could This Gel Help Tame the California Fires?

    A New Digital Twin for an Existing Bridge

    Texas Walks the Line on When the Duty to Preserve Evidence at a Fire Scene Arises

    Colorado’s Need for Condos May Spark Construction Defect Law Reform

    $24 Million Verdict Against Material Supplier Overturned Where Plaintiff Failed to Prove Supplier’s Negligence or Breach of Contract Caused an SB800 Violation

    Defective Concrete Blocks Spell Problems for Donegal Homeowners

    Bid Protests: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (Redeux)

    Traub Lieberman Attorneys Recognized in the 2025 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America®

    Weed Property Owner Gets Smoked Under Insurance Policy

    Ways of Evaluating Property Damage Claims in Various Contexts
    Corporate Profile

    CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING EXPERT
    DIRECTORY AND CAPABILITIES

    The Cambridge, Massachusetts Building Expert Group at BHA, leverages from the experience gained through more than 7,000 construction related expert witness designations encompassing a wide spectrum of construction related disputes. Drawing from this considerable body of experience, BHA provides construction related trial support and expert services to Cambridge's most recognized construction litigation practitioners, commercial general liability carriers, owners, construction practice groups, as well as a variety of state and local government agencies.

    Building Expert News & Info
    Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Richest NJ Neighborhood Fights Plan for Low-Cost Homes on Toxic Dump

    May 28, 2024 —
    Josh Bauers has long had his sights set on the town dump in Millburn. Bauers wants to put 75 affordable apartments on the site where piles of Styrofoam and food scraps lie in heaps. But that’s a bridge too far for many residents of New Jersey’s richest ZIP code, Short Hills, where multimillion dollar Tudor and colonial-style mansions are perched atop grassy hillocks less than an hour’s commute from Manhattan. Many in the community, favored by finance types and lawyers, are up in arms over the development’s potential effect on the environment and its highly-rated schools. But the years-long fight to put affordable housing in the town has become about far more than that, and has raised accusations over inequality and race. Millburn Township, whose largest community is Short Hills, may be forced to build on the dump after a state court ruled last month that it will decide where the development will go. The town had agreed to build on the polluted site three years ago, only to backtrack. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Nacha Cattan, Bloomberg

    Insurer Ordered to Participate in Appraisal

    March 27, 2023 —
    The court found that the insured's request for an appraisal was timely and ordered the insurer to participate. Cloisters of Naples, Inc v. Landmark Am. Ins. Co., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6884 (M.D. Flag. Jan. 13, 2023). A hurricane damaged Cloisters, a condominium. Cloisters made a claim under its commercial insurance policy with Landmark. Landmark acknowledged coverage but failed to pay what Cloisters thought was needed. Cloisters sued. The policy had a standard appraisal provision, but another clause had a suit litigation provision requiring a request for appraisal within two years after physical loss to the property. The dispute was whether Florida law, allowing appraisal clauses to be valid for 130 years, or Georgia law, which had no such extension on requesting an appraisal. Landmark contended the contract was formed in Georgia, so its law should apply. Florida followed the lure of lex loci, which provided that the law of the jurisdiction where the contract was executed governed. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert
    Mr. Eyerly may be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Congress Considers Pandemic Risk Insurance Act to Address COVID-19 Business Interruptions Losses

    May 18, 2020 —
    The draft legislation, entitled the Pandemic Risk Insurance Act of 2020 (“PRIA”), would establish a Federal Pandemic Risk Reinsurance Fund and Program (the “Program”), that is intended to provide a system of shared public and private compensation for business interruption (“BI”) losses resulting from a pandemic or outbreak of communicable disease. PRIA, in its current draft form, is modeled after and in many ways mirrors the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act that was enacted to address catastrophic losses resulting from acts of terrorism. PRIA effectively mandates that participating insurers provide coverage for any business interruption loss resulting from an outbreak of infectious disease or pandemic that is declared an emergency or major disaster by the President and certified by the Secretary of Treasury (the “Secretary”) as a public health emergency. PRIA would be triggered in the case of certified public health emergencies upon the aggregate industry insured losses exceed $250 million dollars, and include an annual aggregate limit capped at $500 billion dollars. The draft bill provides that the Secretary would administer the Program and pay the Federal share of compensation for insured losses, which would be 95% of losses in excess of an applicable insurer annual deductible, once the Program is triggered. The compensation would benefit those insurers that elect to participate in the Program in exchange for a premium paid by the participating insurer for reinsurance coverage under the Program. Reprinted courtesy of Richard W. Brown, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. and Andres Avila, Saxe Doernberger & Vita, P.C. Mr. Brown may be contacted at rwb@sdvlaw.com Mr. Avila may be contacted at ara@sdvlaw.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    When Is an Arbitration Clause Unconscionable? Not Often

    April 05, 2021 —
    Here at Construction Law Musings, I have discussed the pros and cons of various forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), including arbitration. I am a fan of most ADR, but less of one for arbitration than for mediation. However, where the arbitration can be done under a good set of cost-containing rules and with an arbitrator that is experienced in construction, arbitration can help with the resolution of construction claims. Of course, arbitration provisions in construction contracts are routinely upheld by the courts of Virginia with limited exceptions. One of these exceptions is where the arbitration clause is unconscionable and therefore unenforceable. A recent case out of the Western District of Virginia, Marroquin v. Dan Ryan Builders Mid-Atlantic LLC, shows how high a hurdle it is to get a court to invalidate an arbitration provision. In this case, the Marroquins purchased a new construction home from the Defendants. As is often the case in such purchase transactions, Defendant provided a limited warranty agreement (in this case provided by Quality Builders Warranty Corporation (“QBW”)) that along with the sales contract contained a mandatory arbitration provision. The parties executed the limited warranty and the sale proceeded with the Marroquins taking possession. Over the next year or so, the County inspector’s office issued several correction orders to Defendant, and the Marroquins, through counsel, identified numerous defects in construction, many of which they alleged to remain unremedied. Needless to say, they sued for breach of statutory warranty and for breach of the limited warranty. Defendant removed the case to Federal District Court and then moved to compel arbitration. Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill
    Mr. Hill may be contacted at chrisghill@constructionlawva.com

    South Carolina Legislature Defines "Occurrence" To Include Property Damage Arising From Faulty Workmanship

    May 26, 2011 —

    On May 17, 2011, South Carolina passed legislation to combat the restrictive interpretation of what constitutes an "occurrence" under CGL policies. S.C. Code Ann. sec. 38-61-70.

    The legislation reversed a decision by the state's Supreme Court issued earlier this year. See Crossman Communities of North Carolina, Inc. v. Harleysville Mut. Ins. Co., 2011 W.L. 93716 (S.C. Jan. 7, 2011). Crossman had overruled an earlier decision by the South Carolina Supreme Court that holding that defective construction was an “occurrence.” Crossman, however, reversed course, holding that damages resulting from faulty workmanship were the “natural and probable cause” of the faulty work and, as such, did not qualify as an “occurrence.”

    Read the full story…

    Reprinted courtesy of Tred R. Eyerly, Insurance Law Hawaii. Mr. Eyerly can be contacted at te@hawaiilawyer.com

    Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Boston Team Obtains Complete Defense Verdict for Engineering Firm in Professional Liability Matter

    June 08, 2020 —
    Boston, Mass. (June 5, 2020) - Boston Partner Kenneth B. Walton and Associate Oliver J. Vega recently obtained a complete defense verdict after a 10-day bench trial in the U.S District Court for the District of South Carolina. The plaintiff in this matter, who is the owner of a newly acquired food processing facility, alleged breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty claims against our client, a Massachusetts engineering firm, arising out of allegedly defective design and construction management services provided during the renovation of and addition to said facility. Reprinted courtesy of Kenneth Walton, Lewis Brisbois and Oliver Vega, Lewis Brisbois Mr. Walton may be contacted at Ken.Walton@lewisbrisbois.com Mr. Vega may be contacted at Oliver.Vega@lewisbrisbois.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of

    Crowdfunding Comes to Manhattan’s World Trade Center

    January 28, 2015 —
    Got $5,000? You can invest in the 3 World Trade Center skyscraper under construction in lower Manhattan. Fundrise, a real estate crowdfunding business, is inviting individual investors to put as little as $5,000 into bonds backing the 80-story tower, according to a statement e-mailed by Joshua Greenwald, a spokesman for the Washington-based company. The total cost for the Richard Rogers-designed building is projected to be $2 billion. “We think the 3 World Trade Center investment offering is proof of the power of crowdfunding at work,” Dan Miller, co-founder of Fundrise, said in the statement. “We are proud to be able to give more people a chance to invest in this important iconic asset.” Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of David M. Levitt, Bloomberg
    Mr. Levitt may be contacted at dlevitt@bloomberg.net

    Tennessee High Court Excludes Labor Costs from Insurer’s Actual Cash Value Depreciation Calculations

    May 27, 2019 —
    The Tennessee Supreme Court has refused to construe an ambiguous definition of actual cash value to allow for deduction of labor costs as part of depreciation calculations where that subset of repair costs are not clearly addressed in the policy. Despite the split of authority nationwide, the Tennessee case presents a straightforward application of policy interpretation principles to a common valuation issue in first-party property claims. In Lammert v. Auto-Owners (Mutual) Insurance Co., No. M2017-2546-SC-R23-CV (Tenn. Apr. 15, 2019), insureds brought a class-action lawsuit against their property insurer, Auto-Owners, alleging breach of contract. The plaintiffs each owned buildings damaged by a hail storm and had each submitted claims to Auto-Owners. Auto-Owners accepted the claims and determined that the losses would be determined on an actual cash value basis. In performing those valuations, Auto-Owners depreciated both the building materials and the labor costs associated with repairing the properties. The insureds challenged the labor cost depreciation. Auto-Owners moved to dismiss the lawsuit. In response, the insureds requested that the district court certify to the Tennessee Supreme Court whether, “[u]nder Tennessee law, may an insurer in making an actual cash value payment withhold a portion of repair labor as depreciation when the policy (1) defines actual cash value as ‘the cost to replace damaged property with new property of similar quality and features reduced by the amount of depreciation applicable to the damaged property immediately prior to the loss,’ or (2) states that ‘actual cash value includes a deduction for depreciation?”’ Reprinted courtesy of Michael S. Levine, Hunton Andrews Kurth and Geoffrey B. Fehling, Hunton Andrews Kurth Mr. Levine may be contacted at mlevine@HuntonAK.com Mr. Fehling may be contacted at gfehling@HuntonAK.com Read the court decision
    Read the full story...
    Reprinted courtesy of